Open-Minded Liberals at it again

[Dill]

(03-08-2017, 05:12 PM)michaelsean Wrote: How am I defining mass murder?  Murdering a lot of people.  

Your answer still begs the question of how you are defining murder.

E.g. would you say George W. and H.W. Bush were mass Murderers?

What mass murders did Mao commit, for example?

[*bfine32*]

(03-08-2017, 05:28 PM)Dill Wrote: If a Muslim immigrant shoots up a gay night club because he defines "gay" as evil, then yes, that counts as right wing violence. Most Muslims regard themselves as "conservative" and share many beliefs/values with American conservatives. We should not be surprised if they fall to the right of the political spectrum.  

In any case, I didn't use the term "conservatives." I used the term "right wing." And the people who murdered the church people in the examples I gave were motivated by right wing views. What I presented were examples of right wing violence. I could have presented many more, including McVeigh's bombing of the Murrah building in Oklahoma, which killed 168 people.

All of the victims in my examples were targeted for political reasons.

One can call "the left" extremely violent only by excluding all these examples of right wing violence.

So you had no relevant examples so you made up your own criteria.

I will give you a chance to earn strike 2. Any examples of a conservation group committing violence during a liberal function. (To help you along going to a night club, play, work, or church is not a liberal function). A liberal function would be a rally, march, fund raiser, ect...

[Dill]

(03-08-2017, 05:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So you had no relevant examples so you made up your own criteria.

I will give you a chance to earn strike 2. Any examples of a conservation group committing violence during a liberal function. (To help you along going to a night club, play, work, or church is not a liberal function). A liberal function would be a rally, march, fund raiser, ect...

Wait what "criteria" have I made up. 

What is a "conservation group"? environmentalists? 

I ask you if there was a time limit on your question, and gave you a link to the Greensboro massacre, in which Klansman killed 5 actual leftists at a rally. 

[*bfine32*]

(03-08-2017, 05:46 PM)Dill Wrote: Wait what "criteria" have I made up. 

What is a "conservation group"? environmentalists? 

I ask you if there was a time limit on your question, and gave you a link to the Greensboro massacre, in which Klansman killed 5 actual leftists at a rally. 

Well you made up that going to a club, church, work (oh the irony), and a play were liberal functions; however, we can consider your Greensboro case if you want to go with the conservatives are racist and the liberals fight to stop it narrative. That happened 40 years ago. Good work.

Good work on pointing out the typo (most likely autocorrect), you did come up with one point. So we'll say you foul-tipped that one. Strike 2.

One more pitch:
Any examples of a conservative* group committing violence during a liberal function. (To help you along going to a night club, play, work, or church is not a liberal function). A liberal function would be a rally, march, fund raiser, ect...

[Dill]

(03-08-2017, 05:52 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Well you made up that going to a club, church, work (oh the irony), and a play were liberal functions; however, we can consider your Greensboro case if you want to go with the conservatives are racist and the liberals fight to stop it narrative. That happened 40 years ago. Good work.

Good work on pointing out the typo (most likely autocorrect), you did come up with one point. So we'll say you foul-tipped that one. Strike 2.

One more pitch:
Any examples of a conservative* group committing violence during a liberal function. (To help you along going to a night club, play, work, or church is not a liberal function). A liberal function would be a rally, march, fund raiser, ect...

I wasn't pointing out any typo. As I rule I don't police others grammar and spelling, though I may ask a question if something is unclear. I often see typos in my own writing after I post, so it would be stupid to start throwing stones in a glass house.

And I didn't "make up" that going to a club or church were "liberal functions."  I was responding to your claims about extreme leftist violence.  Why would anyone make such claims, when there are so many more, and more extreme, examples of right wing violence in the US, especially mass murder?

I am guessing that if political violence is only political or only violent at "functions," then you hope to create a domain in which "leftists" could appear more violent than rightists.   Or at least you'll have muddied the waters. "Both sides do it."

http://ftrradio.com/2012/12/reporter-injured-as-tea-party-rally-turns-violent-with-racially-motivated-attack/

Pull back, though, and include all politically motivated violence in the US, then there is no contest. Right wing violence trumps all others, always has.

[*bfine32*]

(03-08-2017, 07:28 PM)Dill Wrote: I wasn't pointing out any typo. As I rule I don't police others grammar and spelling, though I may ask a question if something is unclear. I often see typos in my own writing after I post, so it would be stupid to start throwing stones in a glass house.

And I didn't "make up" that going to a club or church were "liberal functions."  I was responding to your claims about extreme leftist violence.  Why would anyone make such claims, when there are so many more, and more extreme, examples of right wing violence in the US, especially mass murder?

I am guessing that if political violence is only political or only violent at "functions," then you hope to create a domain in which "leftists" could appear more violent than rightists.   Or at least you'll have muddied the waters. "Both sides do it."

http://ftrradio.com/2012/12/reporter-injured-as-tea-party-rally-turns-violent-with-racially-motivated-attack/

Pull back, though, and include all politically motivated violence in the US, then there is no contest. Right wing violence trumps all others, always has.

I've muddied no waters as I have only asked the one question. If, in your mind mass murders are the same thing as what we are discussing when we are discussing concerted efforts by the backers of one political party causing violence at another's function then you don't need ne to continue the discussion you can just let your Red Herring argue with your straw man. Someone else's input is not required. 

[Dill]

(03-08-2017, 07:46 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I've muddied no waters as I have only asked the one question. If, in your mind mass murders are the same thing as what we are discussing when we are discussing concerted efforts by the backers of one political party causing violence at another's function then you don't need ne to continue the discussion you can just let your Red Herring argue with your straw man. Someone else's input is not required. 

I took issue with our characterization of leftists as extremely violent, and even provided examples of right wing violence within your narrow definition of "functions."

The "red herring" of far more extreme right wing violence completely vitiates your characterization of what you call the left. So you of course you won't touch that "straw man."  

When you want to keep your beliefs unchallenged, someone else's input is neither required nor desired. 

[Luvnit2]

(02-02-2017, 10:22 AM)GMDino Wrote: Where I work we have a section where every new employee is trained by the most senior employee.

I've been here 18 years and the guy who does the training now has been here 10.  He was trained by a guy who was hired the same time as me.  That guy was trained by someone who was trained by someone who was trained by someone and the only one still here is the the youngest guy.  And he is very good at his job, but each generation of new employee learns it a little differently.  The older guys were better.  It loses something in the translation.

Protesters who turn violent and destructive (IMHO) are so far removed from when protests were peaceful and constructive they have lost the understanding of what to do...plus we also have people who are willing to use the cover of a protest to be violent.  Throw in that society is probably more violent now and that's a recipe for disaster.  

You forgot DEMOCRATIC PROTESTERS TURN VIOLENT AND DESTRUCTIVE ON A REGULAR BASIS NOW, REPUBLICANS RARELY PROTEST AND WHENTHEY DO THEY REMEBER HOW TO PROTEST so not a change in society but a change in Demicratic mentality

[Griever]

(03-12-2017, 10:31 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You forgot DEMOCRATIC PROTESTERS TURN VIOLENT AND DESTRUCTIVE ON A REGULAR BASIS NOW, REPUBLICANS RARELY PROTEST AND WHENTHEY DO THEY REMEBER HOW TO PROTEST so not a change in society but a change in Demicratic mentality

any proof that its actual democrats protesting, or are you just spreading breitbart propaganda?

[BmorePat87]

(03-12-2017, 10:31 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: You forgot DEMOCRATIC PROTESTERS TURN VIOLENT AND DESTRUCTIVE ON A REGULAR BASIS NOW, REPUBLICANS RARELY PROTEST AND WHENTHEY DO THEY REMEBER HOW TO PROTEST so not a change in society but a change in Demicratic mentality

[*michaelsean*]

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/vermont/articles/2017-03-03/professor-injured-after-students-protest-against-guest-talk

Quote:MIDDLEBURY, Vt. (AP) — A Vermont college says a professor was injured by a protester following a demonstration against a guest speaker who's been called a white nationalist.

Hundreds of Middlebury College students protested against the lecture by libertarian author Charles Murray on Thursday, forcing the college to move his talk to another room. The Southern Poverty Law Center considers Murray a white nationalist who argues blacks, Latinos and women are genetically inferior.

The college says Murray and professor Allison Stanger (STANG'-er) were surrounded by a group of protesters and a protester pulled Stanger's hair, twisting her neck. It says the group climbed onto the hood of their car and threw a traffic sign in front of it.

Public safety officials cleared a path for the car to leave.

Stanger was treated at a hospital and released. Murray hasn't commented.

[Benton]

(03-13-2017, 02:16 PM)michaelsean Wrote: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/vermont/articles/2017-03-03/professor-injured-after-students-protest-against-guest-talk

I've made my thoughts on free speech known, and I oppose not letting the guy talk.

That said, I love to laugh at Murray. 'People get mad when you say laziness and low intelligence are genetic.'

No, people get made when you say laziness and low intelligence are genetic disadvantages for brown people.

[*bfine32*]

(03-13-2017, 02:16 PM)michaelsean Wrote: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/vermont/articles/2017-03-03/professor-injured-after-students-protest-against-guest-talk

So the guy who is part of a mixed race family is a racist White Nationalist?

[*michaelsean*]

(03-13-2017, 03:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So the guy who is part of a mixed race family is a racist White Nationalist?

Much like Obama he chose which half.

I guess that means they had no choice but to send the professor to the hospital.

[Benton]

(03-13-2017, 03:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So the guy who is part of a mixed race family is a racist White Nationalist?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/7961211/Hitler-had-Jewish-and-African-roots-DNA-tests-show.html

[*bfine32*]

(03-13-2017, 04:42 PM)Benton Wrote: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/7961211/Hitler-had-Jewish-and-African-roots-DNA-tests-show.html

Of course Murray chose to marry outside of his white race, so there is very little, if any similarity in the two issues. But nothing wrong with comparing as many people as you can to Hitler I suppose.

[Dill]

(03-13-2017, 04:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course Murray chose to marry outside of his white race, so there is very little, if any similarity in the two issues. But nothing wrong with comparing as many people as you can to Hitler I suppose.

Murray thinks that Asians are as intelligent as whites, maybe even a little more so.

Now that we know Murray cannot be a racist or white nationalist because he married an Asian, I am just curious Bfine--

Do you agree with Murray that blacks are genetically inferior to whites, which makes them on the average less intelligent, and so much so that government programs meant to help African Americans are misguided because they are naturally limited by their race?

[*bfine32*]

(03-14-2017, 06:22 PM)Dill Wrote: Murray thinks that Asians are as intelligent as whites, maybe even a little more so.

Now that we know Murray cannot be a racist or white nationalist because he married an Asian, I am just curious Bfine--

Do you agree with Murray that blacks are genetically inferior to whites, which makes them on the average less intelligent, and so much so that government programs meant to help African Americans are misguided because they are naturally limited by their race?

I'm glad at least we agree that Murray is not a racist or White Nationalist. I haven't researched the intelligence matter enough to give an opinion; however, if he supports his suggestion with facts it is something to consider and not simply call him a racist because he does so. Personally I haven't given it much thought. 

I do know when medical exams the are submitted for review the person's "Social Construct" must be indicated as the racists that review such things consider race to be medically significant. I'm sure someone will soon (if not already) view this practice as racist. It could be that these racists just thinks one race is genetically different to another. Do you believe that? 

[*bfine32*]

Here they are displaying their displeasure in song:


 

[Dill]

(03-14-2017, 09:03 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I'm glad at least we agree that Murray is not a racist or White Nationalist. I haven't researched the intelligence matter enough to give an opinion; however, if he supports his suggestion with facts it is something to consider and not simply call him a racist because he does so. Personally I haven't given it much thought. 

I do know when medical exams the are submitted for review the person's "Social Construct" must be indicated as the racists that review such things consider race to be medically significant. I'm sure someone will soon (if not already) view this practice as racist. It could be that these racists just thinks one race is genetically different to another. Do you believe that? 

So you have not "researched the intelligence matter."  But you are sure Murray cannot be a racist or white nationalist?  Hmmmm.  I might agree if I too had not researched the intelligence matter.

I see where you are going with your second question. People who sort out genetic traits for medical purposes must be doing the same thing as people who sort populations for persecution and exclusion. If the latter are "racist" then so must the former be. Right?

But to answer your question, no, I don't think "one race is genetically different to another," though some groups which have lived in geographic proximity to one another for thousands of years may share some traits.